Ukip, an Analysis & Way Forward via The House of Commons & FleXcit with full documentation!

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

.

Hi,

as it becomes ever clearer, to the informed, that Ukip has ever more deeply significant problems beyond the sexual dalliances of its leadership in continental bordellos and employing wives and mistresses, whether past present or future, the divorce of buffoons like Roger Helmer are of little significance – with whom and where they sleep is like them, an irrelevance.

Clearly their much claimed populist positioning and mobilising of a ‘people’s army’ has all the ring of truth of scoundrels such as General Jackson, General Lord Dunat and others in trying to pretend that Britain’s folly of engagement by the self serving degenerate fool Tony Blair and the low grades he gathered around him trying to claim Britain’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan was other than a route, in militarty, political, economic and humanitarian terms.

Clearly it is not just Ukip tyhat is bereft of leadership and sound judgement.

Ukip however is being implausible before the even for even the poorly informed!

You will note the jingo of mobilising a ‘peoples’ army’, which has clearly stalled as shown by the failure of their Police Crime Commissioner candidate in South Yorkshire to get out any kind of vote let alone mobilise those who have not engaged politically in the past scoring a mere 4.7% of the votes of the electorate, albeit a gain on last time when Jonatyhan Arnot had a mere 16,000 or so votes, this time their candidate picked up a little by the increase of turnout from 14.5% to 14.9% and absorbing the votes of last time’s popular English Democrat candidate who did not stand this time.

Hardly mobilising a ‘peoples’ army’ though to be fair the winner with almost double the vote was the Labour candidate an Anglican priest teaching ethics at the local red brick Uni. with a meager 7.4% holding within a few hundred of the disgraced outgoing Labour incumbent; thus showing Ukip is not materially effecting Labour in their he\artlands.

Then much akin to the anti homosexual appearance of Roger Helmer’s comments and Ukip in general, particularly Nigel Farage and his close chum, at the time, Godfrey Bloom – as displayed by Nigel Farage openly denouncing Nikki Sinclaire, an openly declared homosexual subsequent to her gender reassignment, within hours of her being elected as one of his MEPs despite the fact that she went on to donate more of her own money to the Ukip cause in the following 4 montha than Farage himself has donated in 21 years!

Ukip saw a gap in the market – a new band wagon to jump on – and decided to try to increase their vote using the wide open goal and crowd from the now collapsed BNP looking for a new home by preaching a doctrine all too akin to the racist hate material published by their own MEP Gerard Batten to exploit the increase in mobility of people world wide resulting in a huge difficulty dealing with immigrants.

One of Gerard Batten’s odious racist Ukip pamphlets

Ukip were dubiously backed not only by a few police officers of dubious integrity and questionable awsociates but also by a cult of extremist so called self proclaimed ‘christians’!

The mask is slipping! Part of Ukip’s propaganda was to claim that Britain was awash with immigrants but when you study the figures you find that this just isn’t true when compared witjh other countries – not wishjing to let the facts get in the way of an opportunity to make a shoddy case Ukip blamed the EU for this, yet as you will see from the facts in the chart below the argument is unsound:

Just click on the charty for a larger version.

It is worth noting that Ukip champions the cause of leaving the EU, which is of course a sound policy, but to do so dishonestly is to cast their future to the wind!

Were Britain to Leave_The_EU it would not make a jot of difference to our immigrant levels and the fact they site Norway and Switzerland as exemplars shows how very ill informed and dishonest they are since both countries are not only outside of the EU but also have much higher levels of immigration than Britain.

To compound their folly Ukip suggest a role model of Australia as having a much better control of immigration yet where Britain currently has some 13% of our population who are immigrants Australia stands at 27%. Meanwhile although Ukip would seem to be deriving much support and attention from the opposition wing in America where interestingly it is shown to have nearly the identical immigration level to these United Kingdoms with 41M of its 313M peoples being immigrants, thus 13%!

Ukip’s dishonesty is increasingly being seen through, not to mention the3 vile nature of many in its leadership clique and its immediate claque.

One can expect Mark Reckless to be re-elected in the upcoming by election but for the life of me I see absolutely no precedent or track record of figures to show the protest vote stands any chance of seeing him hold his seat in the upcoming General Election – the turn of the wheel when irt comes to actual achievement in Ukip to date shows that Ukip has little hope of gaining MPs at a General Election.

One may well seek to make much of their coming second in several by elections but the difference between 2nd. and 1st. is the difference between success and failure and if they are unable to produce winners in by elections with everything in their favour it seems clear that their sole achievement in a General election will be to ensure Britain NEVER leaves the EU, by destroying what little hope we have of a Referendum and compounding the catastrophe by placing Labour in Downing Street to continue the destruction of Britain they have resol;utely achieved in every other moment of folly where they were elected!

Let us hope the public wake from their somnambulent loss of faith in democracy and return to voting rather than leaving the vote to those jumping on ill informed populist band wagons.

Some reassurance may be found that although Ukip lay claim to 40,000 members they should remember at a time when the eligible electorate was far smaller Baronet Sir Oswald Moseley built up to 50,000, largely pandering to a working-class hooligan strain exploited subsequently by John Tyndall’s National Front in the 1970s in Britain, the same grouping that Alex Salmond endeavoured to tap into in Scotland and Adolf Hitler had successfully exploited in Germany, yet in Britain as a whole Moseley spectacularly failed in electoral achievement as did Tyndall!

Clearly Ukip has failed in domestic elections to dateand without Tory turncoats and malcontents they would be as insignificant as their natural rivals in the English Defence League, Britain First, BNP, English Democrats, Greens and Monster Raving Loonies!

Ukip having spectacularly failed to come up with any plausible and costed serious policies in its 21 years, dismissing former efforts as soon as they are shown to be, to use their own leader’s description ‘drivel’ despite his having personally been in charge of policy inventing most of it ad lib to suit occasions and having personally signed off and commended their last manifesto; being only to happy to lay the blame at anyone’s door rather than shoulder the responsibility for his own ineptitude!

It looks all too likely that Nigel Farage will be squirming around in efforts to lay the blame for Ukip’s totally inaccurate immigrant policy at someone’s door unwilling to damage his income stream and career path by accepting responsibility for his actions!

In 21 years the one policy which Nigel Farage’s party has spectacularly failed to address is a responsible and honourable EU exit and survival strategy – a concept and policy document both far from populist in its required detail and obviously far beyond his or his party’s intellectual ability to produce to date – therefore I take the liberty of putting forward a suggestion that all who genuinely wish to Leave_The_EU amongst the ranks of those who have to date been duped into supporting Ukip consider adopting minded that the ONLY route to this is via referendum which can only be achieved by holding one’s nose and voting Conservative – how so ever one might vote in insignificant protest votes pending the General Election.

To that end and to help Ukip supporters understand the importance of a responsible and honourable EU exit and survival strategy I publish below an article from another blog.

Leaving The EU – 01-Jul-2013

Published yesterday by the House of Commons Library was a research paper on “leaving the EU”. The online introduction is here which offers a download facility for the entire 112-page document. For those who want to look at it without downloading, you can access it here.The paper is edited by Vaughne Miller and she tells us that the Treaty on European Union provides for a Member State to leave the EU, either on the basis of a negotiated withdrawal agreement or without one.

If the UK were to leave the EU following a referendum, Miller says, it is likely that the Government would negotiate an agreement with the EU, which would probably contain transitional arrangements as well as provide for the UK’s long-term future relations with the EU. There is no precedent for such an agreement, but it would in all likelihood come at the end of complex and lengthy negotiations.

The full impact of a UK withdrawal, she adds, is impossible to predict, but from an assessment of the current EU role in a range of policy areas, it is possible to identify issues and estimate some of the impacts of removing the EU role in these areas. The implications would be greater in areas such as agriculture, trade and employment than they would in, say, education or culture.

As to whether UK citizens would benefit from leaving the EU, Miller argues that this would depend on how the UK Government of the day filled the policy gaps left by withdrawal from the EU.

She argues that, in some areas, the environment, for example, where the UK is bound by other international agreements, much of the content of EU law would probably remain. In others, it might be expedient for the UK to retain the substance of EU law, or for the Government to remove EU obligations from UK statutes.

Much would depend, Miller concludes, on whether the UK sought to remain in the European Economic Area (EEA) and therefore continue to have access to the single market, or preferred to go it alone and negotiate bilateral agreements with the EU.

And such is the view of a senior researcher in the House of Commons Library. It is not the definitive word by any means, but it is a contribution to a complex subject, where much debate and clarification is needed. At least, it does explore the Article 50 issue, telling us that an EU-exit would not be straightforward and would involve complex and probably lengthy negotiations over the UK’s future relations with the EU.

In so doing, several of the more egregious myths are debunked. For instance, the decision to leave, we are told, does not need the endorsement or formal agreement of the other Member States. Withdrawal can happen, whether or not there is a withdrawal agreement, two years after the leaving State notifies the European Council of its intention to withdraw.

Nevertheless, we learn, the terms of Article 50 TEU imply an orderly, negotiated withdrawal, and it is clearly indicated that transitional provisions would have to be agreed, allowing EU law and obligations to continue to apply until all loose ends had been tied up. It would not be possible to withdraw immediately from several policy areas without causing enormous disruption.

In my view, such are the complications that completion of negotiations within a two-year period is unlikely, and we could see the UK – as well as the member states – looking for an extension, before a withdrawal agreement could be finalised, with any side treaties that might be needed.

For all its utility, though, the paper has some huge gaps. There is, by way of one example, virtually no recognition of the effect of globalisation of trade, and the expanding role of international standards-setting bodies which, via WTO, are largely displacing the EU as originators of trade regulation.

In this context, a paper that talks of harmonised rules on type approval of road vehicles, that does not mention UNECE and the World Forum on the Harmonisation of Vehicle Regulations, must be considered severely lacking. There is much of the “little European” in the arguments adduced.

For the moment, though, the paper is probably ahead of the field, which means that many commentators will be struggling to catch up. It gets some attention from the advertising and merchandising conglomerate, the Telegraph Media Group Ltd, which offers a thin report, homing in on narrow FUD issues. One suspects its author lacks the intellectual framework with which to assess the paper properly.

But then, media interests have shown little ability to deal with the detailed issues attendant on our leaving the EU – and many of the commenters even less so. The House of Commons researchers are better equipped, although one has to say, not that much better. But their contributions do make a start to what is going to be a long haul.

The Treaty on European Union provides for a Member State to leave the EU, either on the basis of a negotiated withdrawal agreement or without one. If the UK were to leave the EU following a referendum, it is likely that the Government would negotiate an agreement with the EU, which would probably contain transitional arrangements as well as provide for the UK’s long-term future relations with the EU. There is no precedent for such an agreement, but it would in all likelihood come at the end of complex and lengthy negotiations.

The full impact of a UK withdrawal is impossible to predict, but from an assessment of the current EU role in a range of policy areas, it is possible to identify issues and estimate some of the impacts of removing the EU role in these areas. The implications would be greater in areas such as agriculture, trade and employment than they would in, say, education or culture.

As to whether UK citizens would benefit from leaving the EU, this would depend on how the UK Government of the day filled the policy gaps left by withdrawal from the EU. In some areas, the environment, for example, where the UK is bound by other international agreements, much of the content of EU law would probably remain. In others, it might be expedient for the UK to retain the substance of EU law, or for the Government to remove EU obligations from UK statutes.

Much would depend on whether the UK sought to remain in the European Economic Area (EEA) and therefore continue to have access to the single market, or preferred to go it alone and negotiate bilateral agreements with the EU.

Mark D’Arcy in The Telegraph Shows The Utter Irrelevance of The Farage Party!Clearly results prove the point!!

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

.
Hi,I note that Mark D’Arcy, The Telegraph political correspondent, in his predictions for the year ahead makes no mention of any relevance of UKIP but does allude in some detail to the debate obtained in The House of Commons by Nikki Sinclaire!The implication seems to be that Sinclaire has more relevance than all of UKIP, though I do feel that is something of an exageration, though based on actual achievement it does have some credibility as UKIP’s only publicity seems to be the antics of Nigel Farage, which does little but damage in terms of gravitas and his deeply destructive association with xenophobes, racists, anti Jewish, anti homosexual advocates of political violence in his pro EU membership EFD Group does the grass roots members no good!

Little wonder he cares not a jot about the many lost Court cases, the divisve behaviour of his claque and the obvious low rent irrelevance of his NEC whom he ignores as shown by the idiocy of Duffy, McGough and the other nebishes of no consequence.

To quote Mark D’Arcy for January & February:

Meanwhile, in the Commons, the whips will be endeavouring to ensure that the devil does not find work for MPs’ idle hands.
There’s some suggestion of a crunch euro-vote in the Commons at some point in February on moves to increase the UK’s subscription to the IMF – the international emergency finance facility which bails out countries in financial trouble.European test I’m not clear this will actually happen – but if it does, it could provide a difficult test for the government with Labour opposing any extra contribution that could then be used to bail out eurozone economies.
Were Labour and most of the 81 Conservative euro-rebels to join forces, the government would lose.
I’ve been pointing out for a while that the government can’t rely on its majority on issues like this, so the smart thing to do would be not to have the fight, if at all possible.
But secondly, it is a mistake to think of the 81 – the MPs who rebelled in the backbench debate calling for a referendum earlier this year – as a cohesive group, or a party within a party.
In Euroscepticism there are many mansions, and some of the 81 would be very reluctant to cast a vote that might bring down the coalition government or otherwise cause chaos.
Others wouldn’t blink before doing so. What I don’t doubt is that the core sceptic (and I really must find a better word) strategists will want to keep up pressure on ministers they continue to regard as a bit suspect on the European Union.

However what Mark D’Arcy fails to point out is that MPs NEVER vote honestly if it means they might lose their job – Just look at how corrupt was the final Maastricht vote where all those smug and voluble EUroSceptics who to this day claim they voted AGAINST Maastricht voted the bill through to save their own jobs!

I note UKIP is still talking of a surge in the Poles – The only surge in the Poles UKIP has EVER experienced was as a result of Roger Knapman’s family’s people traffiking business which clearly led to a surge in the number of Poles in his attic at the expense of British skilled artisans and labourers!

Here are UKIP’s results in a few recent actual poles (as opposed to theoretical results!):

Westbourne, Brighton and Hove

Conservative

1,027

Labour

826

Green

645

Lib Dem

45

UKIP

36

Trade Unionists &
Socialists Against Cuts

20

European Citizens Party

13

Worlingham, Suffolk

Con

706

Lab586Green137UKIP64LD46

Feltham & Heston (Parliamentary by-election)

Seema Malhotra, Labour – 12,639

Mark Bowen, Conservative – 6,436

Roger Crouch, Liberal Democrats – 1,364

Andrew Charalambous, UKIP – 1,276

David Furness, BNP – 540

Daniel Goldsmith, Green – 426

Roger Cooper, English Democrats – 322

George Hallam, London People Before Profit – 128

David Bishop, Bus-Pass Elvis Party – 93

It is near impossible to describe these results with any honesty or integrity as anything other than catastrophic and consider the fact that to get a mere 10% of the vote needed to win and considerably less % of the overall vote in Feltham UKIP prostituted almost all its policies, slinging them out of the window without a moment of democratic credibility to attract a wealthy clown as candidate!

You will note they have made a similar spectacle of themselves in Wales CLICK HERE is it any wonder they consistently bomb in the reality stakes whatever the surge in the Polls as they may dishonestly claim to be reality!

Or as Roger Knapmann showed, in Daniel Foggo’s well researched report in The Sunday Times, amongst his Poles there was also a surge made by far worse in publicity terms by the crass dishonesty and defamatory statements of the odious and corrupt Mark Croucher!
. .

The Next step will be Westminster betraying the wishes of the electorate and the best interests of these United Kingdoms and our peoples!

This is only the beginning of the end of Britain’s unfortunate and unlawfull membership of The Failing EU – There is a great deal of work on the many steps ahead!

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

.Hi,

well we have the clarity of Nikki Sinclaire’s press release on the subject of HER Petition which has gained a debate in The House of Commons – just a crack in the ice and I do congratulate her for the achievement of over 120,000 signatures so far and growing and also for obtaining cross party support.

Here is her Press Release and then let us consider som e of the ramifications of the even she has driven forward to so hugely influience Westminster and highlight the fact that the peoples of these United Kingdoms by a majority, or so her recent You Gov poll sjhows would vote to leave The EU with a simple majority of 52% voting to leave and only 30% voting to stay!

More convincingly we note that 66% of Tory voters would vote to leave and 74% of Tory voters want an In/Out EU Referendum!

Press Release – House of Commons to debate British membership of the EU

The historic House of Commons debate on if the UK should be allowed a referendum on whether to pull out of the European Union is set to take place next week on Thursday the 27th of October 2011 from mid-day onwards in the main chamber. This follows the presentation to Downing Street of a petition calling for a referendum.If MPs vote in favour of a referendum, David Cameron will come under huge pressure to offer the British public a chance to say for once and for all if they want to withdraw from the EU.

The Commons Backbench Business Committee met this afternoon to set the date. Nikki Sinclaire MEP who instigated and then delivered, along with a broad cross-party delegation of MPs and MEPs, the petition of over 120,000 signatures to No 10 Downing Street said “This is a victory for democracy, and for the common man whose voice has been ignored for too long. It has been a long haul, but gathering these signatures has been a great experience, and my thanks go out to all those people who worked so tirelessly to make this happen”.

The motion that has been submitted for debate is:This House calls upon the Government to introduce a Bill in the next session of Parliament to provide for the holding of a national referendum on whether the United Kingdom

(a) should remain a member of the European Union(b) leave the European Union(c) re-negotiate the terms of its membership in order to create a new relationship based on trade and co-operation.

Nikki Sinclaire has vowed to keep the pressure on David Cameron and his government. “The signatures keep coming in” she said today, “and next Thursday we will be back at the door of 10 Downing Street with even more. The people are speaking out now, the government must listen.”

Sinclaire’s performance throughout has been professional and dedicated but be minded she has continued on multiple fronts to ensure she has provided the service and services her5 constituents nexpect bof her. She has supported the people opposing the illegal settlement of ‘so called’ travellers whilst campaigning for and obtaining the repatriation of a constituent in hospital after a serious accident in Greece and much more with frequent consequential input in The EU’s pretend parliament and participating in ajudication in Tunisia’s democratic dawn.

Probably the greatest displkay of professionalism has been her complete indifference as to who gets the plaudits for the petition she organised and delivered to Parliament – The aim is to work towards winning Britain’s liberty from The EU – leaving the self seekers and the guilty inadequates to try to claim the glory and win the medals.

When all is said and done it is clear that some in UKIP Leadership have ntaken every step they could to thwart and denigrate her efforts with petty jealousies and foolish lies displaying their inadequacies. Let’s leave the fools to posture and try to sieze her achievement as if they had some part in it.

One only needs to note the obvious panic on the part of the Government – such that they plan on a 3 line whip to crush democracy and have brought the date forward in fear of extensive lobbying being organised and to ensure that the biggest traitors in Britain can be in Parliament to issue their abuse of the electorate by FORCING opposition to the concept of the peoples of Britain leaving The EU’s malign and failing project.

Unable to risk a free vote we know the result will be rigged but that we have managed to bring this project to a head and using Parliament’s own suggestion have not just convinced several papers to support a Referendum but given rise to 3 other petitions following in Sinclaire’s footsteps and even the Government hosting a 4th. petition on its web site.

Newsnight earlier this evening showed just how great The Government panic is wioth Macmillan scott clearly telling lies about the petition to try to save face trying to claim a newspaper was behind it which is patently untrue as he knows and seeking to attribute it to UKIP which would clearly have debased its value – in view of their association with extremists, racists and violent xenophobes.

I see no likelihood of this debate leading to a referendum as the Government is foolish enough to cheat the public and nthe wishes of the public but the great benefit of this is that it is another exposure of the venal corruption of our politicians and their determination to serve their own interests – be it fiddling expenses, rigging debates and elections or paying their ‘close’ chums out of the public purse.

The EU project has clearly failed and it is now only supported by those it directly funds with money stolen from the majority. NO POLITICIAN has ever shown a clear benefit for Britain in membership – even Edward Heath had to lie to the public to dupe them into supporting an unlawfull referendum to ratify The Treaty of Rome.

NEVER have the peoples of Britain legitimately voted to be in or support membership of The EU and building this scam on a pack of lies and a raft of corruption is clearly coming home to roost – The Sinclaire Petition and the debate is a small step for a British Patriot but a giant leap for British Patriotism and liberty!

It matters not a jot who gets the medals it is all important that this debate goes ahead as yet another step that has to be made to Leave-the-EU.

If UKIP had built a reputation of integrity, probity, transparency and ethical behaviour this referendum might well have succeeded but due to the damage they have done this debate is just one of the essential steps forward towards Britain’s Liberty.

Well done Nikki Sinclaire and her collaborators and supporters. It is clear she has managed to do more since she was dishonestly removed as a UKIP MEP than EVERY UKIP member of the UKIP Leadership and its parasites enriching themselves at the expense of the genuine members over almost 20 years.

Every journey starts with a single step and obtaining this debate is a massive leap forwards!

Now the hard work begins and let us hope Nikki Sinclaire has the energy and can get the needed financial support to take the battle forward – I hope YOU will lend YOUR support as a patriot.. .